>Those are the scenes that we want to see in the DVD... in what I >call the director's cut.
I'm not intimately familiar with the production history of Fire Walk With Me but everything I've read indicates that the longer version was a rough cut which would be in line with standard practice anyway. I would be surprised if the longer version was in a releasable form since I haven't seen anything that indicates it was but again who knows? Since Lynch apparently had rights to final edit on the film the released version is in fact a director's cut. Still, I'd love to see a DVD with both versions.
There's a growing tendency to refer to any long or expanded version as a director's cut when that's often not true. For examples the long version of Touch of Evil when there can never be a director's cut for that film or even the long version of Dune which was explicitly disowned by the director, but there are plenty more. And these aren't even always better: the revised "director's cuts" of Star Wars and Lethal Weapon are both clearly worse than the originals. Most films are too long anyway.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:30:37 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: Fire Walk with Me
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 09:31:52AM -0400, Neil H. Enet wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong ... but I thought that Lynch wanted to make (he
> actually did) the longer version which includes a lot of scenes that really
> make the film coherent ... because the released version of FWWM is really
> unstable.
There's some good info on this (and some speculation) at
http://www.twinpeaks.org/faqfwwm.htm#f5 which also contains a link to
the script of the missing scenes.
- --
|> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <|
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:42:52 -0500
From: <wlt4@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Re: RE: Fire Walk with Me
>I heard a rumor that the Directors Cut of Blood Simple was shorter >than the original. True?
Depends. Both versions have a running time of 97 minutes but apparently the "Director's Cut" (I'm using quotes because they're really both director's cuts) makes up for the trimming with the faked restoration introduction. So really the story is shorter even though the total time is the same.
Peter Weir's recent re-edit of Picnic at Hanging Rock is shorter than the original by about seven minutes.
- -
------------------------------
End of Zorn List Digest V3 #669
*******************************
To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
"majordomo@lists.xmission.com"
with
"unsubscribe zorn-list-digest"
in the body of the message.
For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
"help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
in the commands above with "zorn-list".
Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
pub/lists/zorn-list/archive. These are organized by date.
Problems? Email the list owner at zorn-list-owner@lists.xmission.com
